Flamer Vs. conventional vehicles

[Pandacron]

So, either I'm completely blind, but is there any effect from the heat given by flamers to a conventional tank? I know Infernos do more criticals, but what about just a simple flamer?

[martian]

So, either I'm completely blind, but is there any effect from the heat given by flamers to a conventional tank? I know Infernos do more criticals, but what about just a simple flamer?

Nothing. Tanks do not track heat. Just 2 damage.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Flamers are remarkably useless against anything other than conventional infantry.

[haesslich]

Can non-VTOL, non environmentally sealed vehicles travel through a hex that's on fire?

[Weirdo]

Can non-VTOL, non environmentally sealed vehicles travel through a hex that's on fire?

They can, but it's risky. It's obviously not as risky as it was pre-Total War, but you don't want to drive through fire.

Flamers are remarkably useless against anything other than conventional infantry.

You should edit your post a bit. It should actually end in  "...conventional infantry, battlemechs, most buildings, things that don't like moving through burning hexes, and anything that doesn't like dealing with smoke modifiers to their shots."

It's a minor spelling mistake, happens all the time. O0

[martian]

I wonder how it's possible that the Dragoon has not been equipped with Flamer.

Does the Emperor know about this design flaw?    ;)

[Sir Chaos]

They can, but it's risky. It's obviously not as risky as it was pre-Total War, but you don't want to drive through fire.

You should edit your post a bit. It should actually end in  "...conventional infantry, battlemechs, most buildings, things that don't like moving through burning hexes, and anything that doesn't like dealing with smoke modifiers to their shots."

It's a minor spelling mistake, happens all the time. O0

Well, they´re good against conventional infantry.

A weapon that raises the target´s heat by two in return for raising your heat by three is HIGHLY situational, the more so as you have to get very close to use it. And for setting things on fire, I´ll take the medium laser´s smaller chance to do so in return for its vastly longer range.

Now that I think of it, for flamers against vehicles, a house rule may be in order that a flamer hitting a conventional vehicle is treated like an Inferno SRM hit.

[Weirdo]

A weapon that raises the target´s heat by two in return for raising your heat by three is HIGHLY situational

I'll admit that in this role, its best usage is on units that mount multiple flamers, especially ones that don't track their own heat. For example, tell me again about your opinion of Flamers after you ambush a 'mech with a squad or two of Shen Long Interdictors. ^-^

Now that I think of it, for flamers against vehicles, a house rule may be in order that a flamer hitting a conventional vehicle is treated like an Inferno SRM hit.

Vehicle Flamers can already do this, since Inferno ammo is one of their optional ammo types.

[NullVoid]

A weapon that raises the target´s heat by two in return for raising your heat by three is HIGHLY situational, the more so as you have to get very close to use it. And for setting things on fire, I´ll take the medium laser´s smaller chance to do so in return for its vastly longer range.

Except you're already expecting those extra three points of heat, while the opponents probably are already counting on all of their heatsinks for offsetting their own weapons.  Those two points of heat might be the difference between rolling or not for an ammunition cookoff.

Now that I think of it, for flamers against vehicles, a house rule may be in order that a flamer hitting a conventional vehicle is treated like an Inferno SRM hit.

A remarkably reasonable assumption for vehicular flamers, which use (possibly) inferno liquid as fuel, but regular fusion flamers spew plasma, which cools down rather than keep burning.

[haesslich]

They can, but it's risky. It's obviously not as risky as it was pre-Total War, but you don't want to drive through fire.

You should edit your post a bit. It should actually end in  "...conventional infantry, battlemechs, most buildings, things that don't like moving through burning hexes, and anything that doesn't like dealing with smoke modifiers to their shots."

It's a minor spelling mistake, happens all the time. O0

That's about the only other way I can think of using flamers against conventional, non-air vehicles. Fire hexes affect mechs somewhat less than the others, but it's still not something I'd care to navigate if I can avoid it.

[SCC]

Don't flamers do both damage and heat?

[Weirdo]

No, it's an 'or' thing, chosen at the moment of firing.

[House Davie Merc]

Flamers are remarkably useless against anything other than conventional infantry.

IMHO Flamers were nerfed a good bit when they removed the " Fire and Smoke " rules from
standard play by not including them in TW .
If more advanced rules are in effect lighting fires can turn the tide of a game .
In the early days of when the clans showed up lighting woods on fire was often
used to limit their range advantages .

Under the standard TW rules flamers can be used to transfer heat to a target mech .

Post double heat sinks that doesn't mean much but in a 3025 era setting a Firestarter's
3 flamers can have quite an effect on some of the most popular heavies of the era.

( like slowing them down , forcing ammo explosion rolls, shutting them down , forcing them
to fire less weapons to stay cool , forcing heat penalties to to-hit rolls ,ETC. )

Combine with SRM infernos for even more fun !


 

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Having a Firestarter get within 3 hexes of me so that it can deliver a potential 6 points of heat after building up 9+ points of heat (depending onmovement and any other weapons fire) isn't all that threatening of a tradeoff.

[Alexander Knight]

Having a Firestarter get within 3 hexes of me so that it can deliver a potential 6 points of heat after building up 9+ points of heat (depending onmovement and any other weapons fire) isn't all that threatening of a tradeoff.

It might be if he drives you to 14+.....

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

That's very unlikely in most circumstances.

[Sir Chaos]

Except you're already expecting those extra three points of heat, while the opponents probably are already counting on all of their heatsinks for offsetting their own weapons.  Those two points of heat might be the difference between rolling or not for an ammunition cookoff.

Highly situational, then. And, while you may be expecting those heat points, you could still have used the heat sinks to fire a more effective weapon, such as a medium laser.

A remarkably reasonable assumption for vehicular flamers, which use (possibly) inferno liquid as fuel, but regular fusion flamers spew plasma, which cools down rather than keep burning.

[Weirdo]

Lasers are only more effective than flamers in certain situations, mostly those that involve doing brute damage. What flamers do is give you options, so you can do other things to them than merely carve up some armor.

And if you *really* want to drive a player crazy, find someone running a TSM unit(especially if he's one of those kids that insists that TSM is wasted if it isn't on all the time), and follow it around with a unit that has a single flamer, maybe two. Push him over the 9-spot for a few turns, and then when he adjusts his heat patterns...hold off for no reason but to see him cool down. >:D

[Alexander Knight]

That's very unlikely in most circumstances.

Then you're either in a Gauss Boat, or you don't ride the heat curve like I do.  (RFL-3N and RFL-4D for the win, bay-bee!)

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

I ride the heat curve plenty, but it'd still be unusual to be that at risk of a shutdown roll except when I get into the situation where I've tied my TIC into whatever's still functioning and have taken to mashing the firing stud like I'm playing Diablo with it.

[Alexander Knight]

All it requires is that you be at 8 heat before the FS9 yells out "Toasty!".  That's not even TSM activation level.  Sure you can reduce what you're shooting if you expect him to try that stunt, but then his flamers have STILL had an effect.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

No, it requires me to be a 8+ heat and him to hit me with at least 3 flamers.  I'm more prone to worry if my opponent is firing Inferno SRMs or Plasma Cannons than flamers.

[Alexander Knight]

Versus the 6 damage he might do with those flamers?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

If he hits me with all three shots.  And there's also sort of the matter of what my fire is going to be doing to him at the same time.  If I'm already going to be at 8+ heat, the odds are good that I'm throwing something significant at him.

[Alexander Knight]

Okay, I think you're missing the point.

The discussion was about a 3025 Firestarter flaming on a 3025 heavy.  In that situation, if the Firestarter gets to range 3, throwing heat with his flamers should be of greater concern to you than just damage.

Is it an earth-shattering threat?  No.
Is it the best tactic with the Firestarter?  Frankly, closing to range 3 vs an undamaged heavy in a Firestarter is a bad idea.
Is it something you can ignore?  No.